Ron Paul has been leading. The polls are lying. As we near the day of the actual vote the media polls will have to start reporting the truth about Dr. Paul's numbers. Mark my words, Dr. Paul's numbers will climb dramatically as the day nears.

8:20 am November 15, 2011

charles1816 wrote:

Don't be fooled, Ron Paul supporters don't flip-flop on their support of him.
We support him 100%
I will only vote for Dr. Paul, end of story.

8:36 am November 15, 2011

ThomasP wrote:

Ron Paul is the only candidate that is consistent, coherent and 'constitution-minded'. He has earned my vote.

Ron Paul 2012. Bring on the primaries and we'll show you who the real winner is!

9:25 am November 15, 2011

Ryan H. wrote:

/* sarcasm

This poll is crap. There's no way this poll is scientific if Ron Paul is a front runner.

end sarcasm */

Ron Paul will not tinker around the edges when it comes to getting our fiscal house in order. He will take a presidential salary of less than $40,000, cut 1 TRILLION dollars from the budget, and phase out 5 executive departments.

Ron Paul needs to be our next president.

9:47 am November 15, 2011

gina wrote:

It's high time Ron Paul is getting a little media attention, (even if it is incorrect) I believe he is in the lead ...judging by how many of the common people contribute to his campaign. Our country needs him in the White House to lead our country back from oblivion.

9:48 am November 15, 2011

Anonymous wrote:

Ron Paul only makes sense if the year is 1840, not 2012.

9:52 am November 15, 2011

Anonymous wrote:

The Republican primary electorate seems to be steeped in agitation and schizophrenia, constantly looking for an alternative to that inescapable boogeyman, Mitt Romney. Deathly afraid of anything that could even be hinted to as reasonable, the GOP base now surges behind Newt Gingrich, he of the checkered past, Rushmore-sized head and ego, and questionable conservative dogma. The party would literally vanish if he were the nominee... http://www.sunstateactivist.org

9:53 am November 15, 2011

gina wrote:

A constitutional government makes sense, whether it's 1840 or 2012 but we really, really need to return to our constitutional roots in 2012, GO RON PAUL!!!

9:58 am November 15, 2011

Justin wrote:

25 SOLID reasons why Newt Can't win!

- Voted for the creation of the Federal Dept. of Education in 1979 under Jimmy Carter.
- Big supporter of Foreign Aid -- even to Soviets through the Export-Import Bank.
- In one year (1994-1995) Gingrich voted for nearly $45 billion in foreign aid.
- He helped push through Federally-funded loan guarantees to Communist China.
- Urged the House to repeal the War Powers Act and give the Presidency more power.
- Urged Clinton to expand military presence in Bosnia.
- Supports Afghan War
- Supports Iraq War
- Calls for Iran War
- Supported Clinton's welfare programs, education programs, labor programs, and environmental programs, as well as most of his foreign affairs programs.
- Supported spending $30B for the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 that shackled gun owners with new restrictions, federalized a number of crimes, and handed the feds police powers that the Constitution reserves to the states.
- Voted to give billions of dollars to United Nations "peacekeeping" operations;
- Pushed for a School Prayer Amendment
- Mentored by Henry Kissinger
- Bailed out savings and loan institutions in 1991. $40B Bank bailout
- He was a draft-dodger during Vietnam, yet advocates foreign interventionism in his political career.
- Worked on the Rockefeller presidential campaign in 1968.
- Card-Carrying member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a globalist think tank
- "Distinguished member" of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (neocon, pro-interventionism group)
- Member of Bohemian Grove
- Member of the World Future Society
- Voted for NAFTA, a blatant circumvention of Congress’ exclusive power to regulate commerce with foreign nations. Took power from American people and put it into the hands of unelected Binational panels, made mostly of foreigners.
- Supported GATT
- Supported WTO
- Continually supported increased federal spending.

9:59 am November 15, 2011

Justin wrote:

25 Solid Reasons why Mitt Romney won't win!
1. Obamacare was modeled after RomneyCare in MA
2. As governor he hiked taxes, fees and fines dramatically
3. Romney as governor increased spending by 20% in 2 years!
4. Al Gore praises Romney for being a global warming believer
5. Supports Cap n Trade, a policy that would devastate America
6. As governor came in second to last in the country for job creation
7. Supports TAARP
8. Flooded MA with liberal democrat judges
9. Believes in Amnesty for illegal immigrants
10. Received advice from Obama's Science Czar Holdren on Global Warming and mandatory abortions.
11. Supports limiting the 2nd amendment via gun control legislation
12. Was "more pro choice than Ted Kennedy" before he was prolife, which is/was it?
13. Was for gay marriage before he was for civil partnerships.
14. Set up a 527 committee funded by GEORGE SOROS (puppetmaster)
15. Raised more lobbying funds that the whole GOP combined!
16. Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, BOA, JP Morgan, Citigroup, give him more donations than Obama, and don't forget, Banks made more in 2 years under Obama than Bush's whole presidency! Who will he be beholden to? We know that answer!
17. Endorses anti-union laws (middle America won't like this)
18. Working at Bain Capital, he stripped company of their assets, sold them off, and fired workers in masse!
19. Like 2008, his support is capped at 20%
20. Hurts pro-family causes with legislation and appointments
21. Provided Taxpayer-Funded Abortions for copay of $50.
22. Since the bill became law, the state’s total direct health-care spending has increased by a remarkable 52 percent. Medicaid spending has gone from less than $6 billion a year to more the $9 billion. Many consumers have seen double-digit percentage increases in their premiums. Could you or America afford this?
23. Has yet to sign the Susan B. Anthony List pledge to defend life and defund Planned Parenthood nationwide
24. He believes in CORPORATE PERSONHOOD, "corporations are people too"
25. He flip flops so much, shares the same donors and advisors as Obama, he is definitely a RINO, trying to continue what Barack Obama has done to America

10:00 am November 15, 2011

Justin wrote:

30 SOLID reasons why Herman Cain won't win!

1) The investigation into election and campaign fund and law violations....
2) Bankrupting employee pensions at Aquila and getting sued for it.
3) Endorsing Alan Greenspan architect of the Real Estate Bubble.
4) Funneling over 100k in individual campaign donations to his company to purchase his book.
5) Not knowing China had nuclear weapons - whooops!
6) Godfather success story is based on his laying off 300 employees and closing 1/3 of the stores. The company never had growth or expansion afterward, it even lost 50% of its sales. How is that for success?
7) Breaking FEC laws on allowing a non profit to use funds for political purposes.
8) Dismissing the 08 downturn of the economy and then endorsing a stock during the downturn that lost 80% of its value costing investors hundreds of thousands $$
9) Donated to Mitt Romney's 08 campaign and actively worked promoting Romney. Stating openly he would willingly be Romney's VP.
10) Altered his "tax" plan to allow for hedge funds to make more.
11) Wants a gradual 23% unconstitutional national sales tax.
12) Pulling the race card 3x's - Blaming others for his personal drama
13) Not wanting to audit the Federal Reserve
14) Voting for Clinton and Lunching with Henry Kissinger
15) Twisting and flipping on the issues till we are dizzy
16) Not knowing how to amend the Constitution
17) No Military, foreign policy or law/court background what so ever.
18) Border security is something to joke about and his border security plan mirrors Rick Perry's down to the "Boots on the Ground Stance"
19) Proposing Opportunity Zones where SOME Americans will be exempt from Income Tax
20) Surrounding himself in his personal life with long term staunch Democrats which support Barack Obama.
21) An Economic plan that mirrors one in SIM CITY video game
22) Being Anti Abortion - making it illegal BUT advocating Pro-Choice - it is the woman's right to choose (I still haven't figured this one out). - So it would be illegal but it would be ok if the woman chose to do it..?? HUH?
23) Was against a flat tax before he was for it
24) Backed by the Koch brothers
25) Represented Whirlpool at a Security & Peace Partnership (North American Union) summit in Canada in 2007
26) He supported TARP
27) He supports the UN-Constitutional Patriot Act
28) Herman Cain's 999 tax plan is revenue neutral, no tax-revenue will be lost, no spending will be cut, and the burden will be shifted from the wealthy to the middle-class
29) Bloomberg investigation alleges Koch subsidiaries paid bribes, sold to Iran (illegal trade)
30) His blatant flip-flop away from the Constitution with the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki. First he believed al-Awlaki deserved a trial, then he fully supported his assassination without an indictment or any form of due process.

10:16 am November 15, 2011

Gil from Wyoming wrote:

1 reason none of them will beat Obama: They are all idiots.

10:20 am November 15, 2011

President Obama wrote:

So, those are 80 of the thousand reasons

why

President Obama

Will win.

(and 70 million votes)

10:28 am November 15, 2011

Rienone wrote:

Go Ron Go!

10:30 am November 15, 2011

EdBrown wrote:

Nice job Justin!

10:30 am November 15, 2011

GMason1776 wrote:

The CBS debate truly was a disgrace. It was obvious that a vote for any of the establishment Republican candidates is a vote for another unfunded war, this time with Iran. And yet the one candidate on the stage who is against starting a war with Iran, the only one that was right about the war in Iraq, was only given 90 seconds to speak. CBS preferred to let all the other pro-war candidates talk amongst themselves as if there is no option available other than all out war. Newt was even talking about assasinating scientists within Iran as a prelude to military intervention. When does it all end? There will always be some threat, real or perceived, in the world. Are we going to fight wars endlessly? We are bankrupt. And yet the war drums are beating again. And Ron Paul is not allowed to even present an opposing viewpoint. And yet here he is in a statistical tie for 1st place in Iowa. The people are beginning to awaken from their slumber. No longer will we serve as cannon fodder for the Washington elite. As Ron Paul said, if our national security is threatened, then let Congress declare war and fight to win. Otherwise, bring the boys home and end this ridiculous foreign policy.

Long live the Republic!
Ron Paul 2012

10:36 am November 15, 2011

Joanne P. wrote:

I agree with GMason1776, Ron Paul is ignored and undermined by the media. It is imperative that the voting public conduct their own online research in order to understand the position Ron Paul represents which is in the best interest of every American.

10:38 am November 15, 2011

anti romney wrote:

Un-Romney

Vote for Ron Paul

10:44 am November 15, 2011

gina wrote:

Well said, GMason1778

10:50 am November 15, 2011

mike bklyn wrote:

Ron Paul 2012 ,

11:02 am November 15, 2011

Ron Paul wrote:

When does the Libertarian Party start its nomination process? I love my supporters, but the Establishment Republicans are never, ever going to support me to get the nomination and I will not even be seriously considered for Vice-President. So, I guess its back over to the Libertarian Party again where I can disappear just like I do every Republican presidential campaign for the last 20 years.

11:09 am November 15, 2011

obamamania wrote:

No Exciting Choices

Poll participant Nate Warwick, 34, a machine operator at a packaging factory who lives in Story City, Iowa, is leaning toward Romney, primarily because he thinks he has the best chance of defeating President Barack Obama in 2012. Still, he’s not excited about his choices.

“There’s nobody out there who is really grabbing my attention, wholly,” he said. “I don’t think the Republican Party has a candidate that can beat Obama right now.”

11:12 am November 15, 2011

obamamania wrote:

And what the hell happened to Rick Perry?? Have you ever seen a candidate rise and fall faster than that wannabe cowboy?

11:13 am November 15, 2011

UnitedStatesofIsrael wrote:

The media has known that Dr. Paul will win the election and they have done everything they could to stop him and they have failed. Now that the primaries are approaching they will begin labeling him as a 'top tier' candidate to save face. To bad the cats already out of the bag. Every writer, editor, producer and owner of these networks needs to tried for treason against the American people.

11:38 am November 15, 2011

1st wrote:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

11:41 am November 15, 2011

Tin Foil Hat Needs Adjusting wrote:

Nobody has been suppressing Ron Paul, he's just not a serious candidate with his pro-heroin, pro-terrorist rights, and his Alice-In-Wonderlandian economic views. He's a joke, like always, and soon he'll slink over to the Libertarian party, like always.

Establishment Republicans and Social Conservatives are never, ever going to support Ron Paul, and he doesn't get enough votes from his pot grower and meth cooker base.

11:45 am November 15, 2011

Tin foil my nutsack wrote:

Ron Paul is not pro-heroin. He believes States should make their own policies. Ron Paul is not pro-terrorist. He believes that "All men are created Equal" and should be allowed to face their accusers in court, which makes us the bastion of Freedom and not some dank, johnny-come-lately when it comes to following our Rule of Law.

I am an Establishment Republican and I am voting for Ron Paul

11:46 am November 15, 2011

You Are Not An Establishment Republican wrote:

Put down the bong

11:47 am November 15, 2011

Bkusz wrote:

Wow, they actually added Ron Pauls name and without some negative slant.

I have been a republican for 20 years, have voted in all but one primary and all but one general election. I WILL be voting for Ron Paul

11:52 am November 15, 2011

Paul hashish wrote:

Put your Dr. Ron Paul

in your bong

and smoke it.

11:54 am November 15, 2011

Anonymous wrote:

Tea baggers like your nut sack pauliboy.

12:06 pm November 15, 2011

Anonymous wrote:

Neither the Democratic nor Republican party will nominate a libertarian for president. Even if Paul does well in Iowa, a small, caucus state, he'll be a non-factor in larger, primary states, as he always is.

Anyone want to make a gentleman's bet that Paul won't exceed single-digits in Florida, or any other state with a primary election and a larger population than Iowa? Anyone?

12:22 pm November 15, 2011

JM wrote:

I'll wager. I believe Ron Paul is the man to beat this year. He is the ONLY serious candidate in this debate, hands down.

PRESIDENT RON PAUL, 2012-2016

12:32 pm November 15, 2011

Independent wrote:

If he wants to play ball

true third party candidate

and strong running mate

we will vote for Ron Paul

12:44 pm November 15, 2011

defendusa wrote:

I do not, for the life of me, understand the passion of the Paul supporters. Your candidate, while absolutely earnest and honorable, cannot win a single primary let alone the nomination.

Why do you not see this fact?

12:47 pm November 15, 2011

Austrian School wrote:

defendusa:

The poll shows in fact that Ron Paul CAN win the Iowa primary!

Jump on board for RP. It will be the best time of your life. He is a man that stands on principle and does not kowtow.

12:50 pm November 15, 2011

Jalamoe wrote:

I love how everyone with something negative to say about Ron Paul either has no clue what they're talking about, are misrepresenting the views of Dr. Paul, or are simply attacking him.

Who WOULDN'T want to save this country of geniuses?

12:55 pm November 15, 2011

Capt. Lewy wrote:

@ Austrian School

Iowa doesn't have a primary. It is a caucus state, which plays to Paul's strengths of organization and small turnout. When the race gets to larger primary states like Florida, e.g. his single-digit support will emerge.

12:59 pm November 15, 2011

Centinel wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
.Neither the Democratic nor Republican party will nominate a libertarian for president. Even if Paul does well in Iowa, a small, caucus state, he’ll be a non-factor in larger, primary states, as he always is.

Anyone want to make a gentleman’s bet that Paul won’t exceed single-digits in Florida, or any other state with a primary election and a larger population than Iowa? Anyone?
___________________________________________________________________________________

If Ron Paul wins or comes in a close second in either Iowa or New Hampshire, his support will begin to grow as his message of freedom and prosperity, which is now not reported by the mainstream media, begins to be heard by the masses. Right now, there are three candidates people see as being conservative (Cain, Gingrich, Paul) and opposing Romney. Cain will soon fall off because of the sexual harassment allegations. It will be down to Paul vs Gingrich for the conservative vote. While Gingrich has experience and is an excellent politician, his conservative credentials can not compare to Ron Paul. Eventually it will come down to Paul vs Romney for the nomination, with the future of the GOP and the USA hanging in the balance. We can again become a nation based on liberty, limited government, and prosperity in accordance with the founding principles or we can continue on the path of supporting a large central government that erodes civil liberties at home, engages in endless wars abroad, and destroys our economy with their constant taxing and spending. The choice is clear.

Ron Paul 2012!

12:59 pm November 15, 2011

Austrian School wrote:

Capt. Lewy:

True enough. But Paul winning the caucus would not discount his victory. Huckabee was able to make waves in 2008 by doing just that, along with a bevy of other candidates in modern history.

Why the constant “discounting” of his support? I view his supporters as his greatest strength.

1:27 pm November 15, 2011

Brian wrote:

I've considered all of the candidates and none reflects my views for the country more than Paul.

I hope more people look into him.

1:52 pm November 15, 2011

Capt. Lewy wrote:

@ Austrian School -

I don't "discount" his supporters. It is his greatest strength, I respect it. But Iowa is Iowa, there are 49 other (mostly) larger states.

And Huckabee, who you cited, is a good example. Once outside of Iowa, his support faded. He DID NOT win the nomination. He "made waves" while John McCain ran for president.

2:29 pm November 15, 2011

Establishment Republican wrote:

Same old, same old. Every election cycle the Paulbots get excited thinking that Ron Paul *might* actually have a chance. Then after the first couple of elections, he disappears to the Libertarian Party where he is forever forgotten until the next election cycle.

No different result this year, no matter how many posts the Paulbots make.

2:42 pm November 15, 2011

Jack wrote:

LOL. I hope the RP haters are joking. If Ron wins Iowa it's OVER. The media will be FORCED to buzz about him and everyone accepts that's the only reason he hasn't been winning all along. If he wins Iowa, he wins the 2012 election.

2:44 pm November 15, 2011

Dave Infinger wrote:

I am a retired US Army NCO who served my Country for over 23 years. and I will be voting for Ron Paul. It is great to see that the American people are waking up and realizing that Dr. Paul is telling the truth. Jim Rogers was being interviewed last night and he says that Ron Paul is one of the few who is telling the truth.

Please vote for Ron Paul and end these wars. So many of our veterans are committing suicide every week. We got to bring sanity back to this Country and Ron Paul will do that.

I want to thank the writer of this article for an awesome unbiased report.

2:55 pm November 15, 2011

Expat wrote:

The USA is bankrupt. We debase our money and print dollars to buy our own bonds, just to keep the ponzi scheme going. Ron Paul is the country's last hope for honest money and a strong dollar. Unless you all want to earn American pesos in the future and become the third world laughingstock of the world (which we already are), then vote Ron Paul.

3:08 pm November 15, 2011

Anonymous wrote:

"If he wins Iowa, he wins the 2012 election."

That's what Mike Huckabee's supporters said in 2008.

3:25 pm November 15, 2011

Jack wrote:

@Anonymous. Do you think Huckabee can even compare to RP? If Ron Paul and the virility of his message mix with the mainstream media, NO ONE can compare hope to compare to him.

3:44 pm November 15, 2011

Ted Baker wrote:

Long Live Ron Paul!!!!! Everyone I know and their family is voting Ron Paul! The Thomas Jefferson of our day.

4:45 pm November 15, 2011

toxic newt wrote:

Many newts produce toxins in their skin secretions as a defense mechanism against predators. Gingrichian newts of North America are particularly toxic

4:52 pm November 15, 2011

defendusa wrote:

Austrian School I appreciate your commitment. Your candidate cannot win a single primary. That is the point. To sight Huckabee is to sight a losing candidate. Is that your point?

4:55 pm November 15, 2011

I owa you wrote:

[edit]Iowa and New Hampshire

2008 Iowa

On January 3, 2008, the Iowa caucuses began. The final averaged results from Real Clear Politics showed Mike Huckabee at 30%, Romney at 27%, McCain and Thompson tied at 12%, Paul at 7%, and Giuliani at 6%.[7] Among those surveyed in Exit Polling data, 45% cited themselves as very conservative and voted for Huckabee 35% to Romney's 23% and Thompson's 22%. Among those who called themselves "somewhat conservative" (43%), Huckabee won 34% to Romney's 27% and McCain's 18%.[8]
Final Results showed Huckabee swept much of the state with the exception of the western and eastern portions of the state which included Davenport, Cedar Rapids, as well as Sioux City. Romney swept the eastern and western portions of the state and Paul took one southern county. The final results in Iowa were Huckabee with 34%, Romney with 25%, Thompson and McCain each with 13%, Paul with 10% and Giuliani with 4%.

Did you know that Ron Paul has NEVER won one single primary or caucus in all those many presidential elections. He wins the straw polls and those do not help much.

Huntsman’s the man. The clowns will fall fast once the primary voting begins. Look for December’s poll to look nothing like what you see now, with the except for Romney’s steady 30% ceiling. I bet it ends up a dogfight between Romney, Gingrich and Huntsman. I don’t see Gingrich self destructing as some think. He may not win, but his focus has only sharpened since his early organization shakeups when he was still in the “book-tour” mode, and he knows the topics frontward and backwards. Huntsman has been my choice for a few weeks now and I agree with many who think he’s the only one Obama strategists are truly leery of. I think the only reason Huntsman hasn’t caught on with the base is because of the three ring pandering circus of Bachman, Palin, and Cain which is soon to fizzle completely out. I like Ron Paul, but he’s simply unelectable. After a couple of primaries hopefully we’ll see the drop-outs through their support to Huntsman.

11:34 pm November 15, 2011

Ari Gold wrote:

Libertarianism is heartless? Heartless is continuing unconstitutional wars, not declared by Congress, and sacrificing the lives of our people. Heartless is bailing out these big companies, because their CEOs don't know how to make their company profitable. That's just a complete falsehood, why, because it's not right that our government takes from us to give to others, and also wasting it on top of it all? No one is stopping you from helping out personally, why do you need a government to force you to help others? Not to mention that charity is a moral issue, not a government issue, unless you're okay with our government banning gay marriage?

3:53 am November 16, 2011

Say goodbye to Cain wrote:

Cain ..... I just finished watching our President answer difficult questions at a press conference with the Prime Minister of Australia. Funny thing about the foreign press, they ask tough, thoughtful­, carefully considered questions. And all I could think of is you, Herman, in that same situation. The only thing you could answer off the top of_your_he­ad_, through the din of the twirling going on in there, is the size of_your_P I M P_ H A T.........­..........­...

You, sir, are a disingenuo­us joke that has ceased to be remotely funny.....­..........­.....

9:40 am November 16, 2011

Anonymous wrote:

January

In IOWA

THE SNOW

WILL COVER

EVERYTHING

ROMNEY

TOUCHES

10:34 am November 16, 2011

Ding dong the newt is dead! wrote:

In recent months, GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has strongly criticized Freddie Mac and sister company Fannie Mae, as well as Democrats in Congress that he claims played a key role in the collapse of the housing market. And yet two former Freddie Mac officials recently told Bloomberg that Gingrich made between $1.6 million and $1.8 million in consulting fees from the mortgage company.

That amount is significantly larger than the $300,000 payment that Gingrich was asked about during a Republican presidential debate on Nov. 9.

The Freddie Mac officials also told Bloomberg that Gingrich was asked to build bridges with Capitol Hill Republicans and help sell the mortgage company’s public-private structure to conservatives.

7:37 pm November 18, 2011

Stefan wrote:

Ron Paul will win easily.

Add a Comment

Error message

Name

We welcome thoughtful comments from readers. Please comply with our guidelines. Our blogs do not require the use of your real name.

About Washington Wire

Washington Wire is one of the oldest standing features in American journalism. Since the Wire launched on Sept. 20, 1940, the Journal has offered readers an informal look at the capital. Now online, the Wire provides a succession of glimpses at what’s happening behind hot stories and warnings of what to watch for in the days ahead. The Wire is led by Reid J. Epstein, with contributions from the rest of the bureau. Washington Wire now also includes Think Tank, our home for outside analysis from policy and political thinkers.